That's an unfair scenario. There could be many quality differences between enterprise and consumer drives that simply don't come up in their environment. I know when I make consumer and enterprise-grade objects, of course the consumer-grade objects work -- I don't build carp -- but the enterprise-grade work better. For many values of better. Most often, that better includes things like a wider temperature range, dirtier air, and more frequent and rougher shipping. Even my packaging is wildly different as a result. Better foam, larger boxes. Also interestingly stupid things like additional electrical certifications. And then there are emergency situations like easier repair, in this case data-rescue would be a major feature, as would fire and flood resistance..
Hey, I've paid a lot for this name, and continue to do so. So if that's sarcasm, the joke's on you. It actually is my official and registered alias. You might try it some time -- proves that you actually care about what you say, standing behind your own words and whatnot.
What you're missing is that in the IT industry, specific models of hardware and specific versions of software isn't specific at all. So that's actually a very wide swath. Models have sub-models and configurations and versions, software versions have subversions and minor versions and releases and bulids too. But that's not what I mean.
The techniques by which a given professional uses those tools, how they put things together, their general attitudes towards the big-5 orientations, that's where your flexibility is.
The reasons that job requirements list the components, and not the techniques, are:
a. techniques are very difficult to read, write, understand, and accurately describe. Doing so would be incredibly confusing and never quite right.
b. most components simply aren't compatible with most other components. So much so that any professional with enough experience to have an opinion also winds up having a preferences. He simple doesn't want to fight with other components.
c. within any specific component, there exists a sub-world of amazing things that particular component can do that nothing else can. If you find the right expert, specializing only in that component, there are some wow things.
So then you should start fixing that problem. Your problem isn't with censorship. Your problem is with the ability for laws to spread unimpeded. That's the problem on which you ought to be focusing your efforts.
Fix the system, then you won't need to fight it.
Well, until then, I consider it rude to talk to a stranger without introducing yourself. So I'm done talking with you.
They actually aren't "removing" anything. They simply aren't allowing others to sell access to it. They aren't taking down the web-site, and they aren't even taking down the web-site's hosting. They are simply not permitting the telecom company to re-broadcast it for money.
That means you can start your own telecom ISP, make it your business policy to not censor, make that the promise to every paying customer -- make it evident and obvious that's exactly what you're selling and how you differentiate your business -- and the government actually won't be able to stop you, nor will they want to do so.
The fact that you won't create such a service, and neither will the existing telecom companies, is a different issue.
So if that's your argument, you might want to open with it.
You might want to not censor your name here.
You can't usually leave most buildings that you've entered -- because you've usually entered them for a reason that has no reasonable alternative. Think about renewing a licence, grocery shopping, the bakery, movie theatre, home improvement store. For most people, the alternative is another home improvement store of the same brand twenty minutes away.
Let's use the movie theatre as a great example. Actually, it might be the perfect example. A movie poster for next year's movie is, let's say, your idea of vulgar. You're at the movie theatre to see the latest disney movie (these days that covers both star wars and toy story, so you can pick). Whether or not you've brought your 8-year old nephew is up to you. It's a 5 minute walk from your home.
But you see the poster, you'd be forced to stare at it while standing in line for tickets and for entry into the cinema, you don't like it, so you leave. You walk back home. You get into the car, and you drive fifteen minutes to the next theatre. It's the same brand, and they have the same poster and same layout. So you get back into the car, and you drive another thirty minutes two towns over where the theatre company is different.
But they show the same movies, and therefore they have both the movie you want to see, and the poster that you don't.
So your only remaining option is to not go to any movie theatre until next year's movie poster is taken down -- which will be next year.
It's all private property. It's all recreational. And there's no getting away from it.
Now no one's saying that you find the colour green offensive. But there's something that could be in a movie poster that would ruin your night. It might be something very gory from a horror movie. It might be a perfectly fine scene from an R rated horror movie when you're trying to see a PG rated disney movie.
Ultimately, government censorship is supposed to be like movie ratings. This doesn't contain that. You won't accidentally see that when you're looking at this.
Web-sites have links. Web-sites have frames. Web-sites have ads, pictures, and public comments. Obviously there's going to need to be some limits some where.
You shouldn't like it. But you should desire it. And you should definitely expect it.
The Internet began as a freedom of speech thing the same way me standing in a park did. But that was in the '80s. Now, the Internet acts as a full publication and broadcast system, like me putting up a six-storey banner on the side of a skyscraper.
There have always been laws governing what you can say in a public arena.
Today, it's the norm for 3-year olds to use online systems, as well as educational institutions, and a whole host of real-world legitimate and vital purposes. It's no longer an optional activity at all in most circles.
So the question to ask yourself: is there anything that you wouldn't accept painted onto the side of a downtown building? You can always walk a different way to work and not see it. I'll bet there's something that you would call inappropriate as a public display. It may be something as simple as your grandparents kissing.
Whatever it is, that's what we've come to. And it's no surprise. For all the reasons that broadcasts have ever been appropriately restricted, so should the internet be.
Now, you can certainly complain with the way that it's done. You can be upset at the sheer number of false positives. You can be correct in saying that it may actually be impossible or unfeasible to enforce. But then that becomes the debate, not the need for the restriction in the first place.
I promise you that right now, today, there aren't too many business owners. Stop scaling everything to infinity. We're not at any risk of every 50+ running a business tomorrow.
Oh, and many 50+ retire, semi-retire, run businesses without many employees, some have no problem finding work, they "hire" each other, and six 50+ can get together to run a company -- doofus.
And yes, it's got everything to do with your age and experience, but not the way that you think. I expect younger people to be inexperienced, and need supervision. I expect a young contractor to require management, and being told what to do. I also expect someone with your age and experience not to be a drain on society. I expect you to be running your own business, hiring your own young employees, and creating jobs.
If you've spent four decades working in the industry, and you haven't gotten to the point where you can start creating jobs, instead of just consuming them, then I don't value your experience anymore. It's that simple. It's your responsibility to start putting your money where your mouth is and to start taking your own employment risks. No one's ever refused to hire a company because the owner is 50+.
So that's my advice to you. Start creating jobs, stop consuming them.
Yeah, I didn't maintain the logical direction, but I think my point was clear: each involves a forced behaviour.
Of course we can. Especially with the new definitions of "drunk".
Damn. Wish I could mod you up. Agreed.
Oh look, a hugely significant percentage of humans in a given environment want to do something. It comes with an added danger. Let's prohibit them from doing it! Because that works. It's always worked in the past, with everything from alcohol to abstinance.
Or, we can do what actually works. We can train people to do it well enough to lower that risk of danger.
Make it a part of the drivers' test. Make it just another mark on the drivers' licence -- same as glasses, motorcycles, and transport trucks. I learned to drive in a blizzard in the dark, and just did it again tonight for over an hour. I can learn to text while driving on a clear day. Teach me. I'll learn.